This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lovett, H. T. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Effect of Violating the Assumption of Equal Item Means in Estimating the Livingston Coefficient

Mississippi State University

The validity of five methods of estimating the reliability of criterion-referenced tests was evaluated: one method based on the binomial expansion; two based on Kuder and Richardson's formulae 20 and 21; and two methods based on the analysis of variance. The methods were compared across nine conditions of variability among item means. Within each condition the number of test items, number of testees, the value of the criterion, the population mean, and variance of true scores were varied to form 1024 cases. The results were analyzed by means of a conditions-by-methods analysis of variance, the Newman-Keuls test, and a nonparametric multiple comparison procedure. There was a tendency for all of the methods to be conservative. The KR-21 method tended to be more valid given low variability among item means, and the KR-20 method given high variability.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 38, No. 2, 239-251 (1978)
DOI: 10.1177/001316447803800205


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. E. Traub and G. L. Rowley Reliability of Test Scores and Decisions Applied Psychological Measurement, October 1, 1980; 4(4): 517 - 545. [Abstract]